Charge Members Agendas Minutes Reports FYI

Meeting Wednesday, September 9, 1998 9:00-11:00AM, SCC Conference Room Members present: C. Frank Abrams, Carolyn D. Argentati, David E. Broome, David A. Danehower, Scott Despain, Peggy E. Hoon, C. Ernest Knowles, Carolyn R. Miller, Sandra Newville, Everette M. Prosise, Rebeca G. Rufty, Clifford R. Swanson, Ross Whetten. Agenda 1. Distribution of Task Force Notebook 2. Member Introductions 3. Discussion of Charge 4. Other Business 5. Adjourn Minutes 1. The meeting was called to order by co-chair Ross Whetten at 9:05AM, and meeting materials were distributed. Included in those materials were a copy of the meeting's agenda, a current membership roster, a draft copy of Whetten's and Danehower's Town Meeting Flyer, and a group of documents constituting an informal Copyright Ownership Task Force Notebook. The notebook's contents included the following titles: "Ownership of Electronic Course Materials in Higher Education," "Position Paper on Yale University Copyright Policy," "Learned Inquiry and the Net: The Role of Peer Review, Peer Commentary and Copyright," "Discussion Draft: Copyright Considerations for Faculty-Authored Multimedia Instructional Materials," "Policy Perspectives: To Publish and Perish," "Free Internet Access to Traditional Journals," and "Who Owns What?" The group made a motion to request that the NCSU Libraries provide administrative support for the task force. The motion was seconded and carried. The Scholarly Communication Center's Program Assistant, Annis Barbee, will provide that support. [return to top of document] 2. Each member of the task force introduced him/herself and explained his/her specific interest/concern regarding copyright. The membership roster was reviewed for accuracy in campus box, e-mail, fax, and phone numbers, and appropriate changes were made. An updated roster will be issued. Whetten stated that Hoon will be gathering various URL's for pertinent web sites and articles on copyright ownership and university policies to add to the Copyright Ownership Task Force Notebook. Whetten announced that Michael A. Rappa, Alan T. Dickson Distinguished University Professor of Business Management in the NCSU College of Management would be added to the task force by formal appointment. It was also acknowledged that the task force lacked representation from the undergraduate and graduate student body. Recommendations were entertained to contact the GSA for a representative from that organization and to contact the head of Student Government, Jenny Chang, for a representative of that student group. [return to top of document] 3. Discussion of the charge. The charge to the task force was read and discussed. Regarding the three key points of the charge, the members considered dividing the task force into two sub-groups. The task force divided itself accordingly: Group 1 will study legal issues, pending legislation and its potential impact on universities and copyright, and current copyright law, statutes, and related commentary. Directed by Danehower, this group includes Hoon, Mark Crowell, Abrams, Argentati, and Newville. Danehower also plans to start an outline of what the ultimate policy recommendations should look like. Group 2 will look at currently existing policies and proposals at other universities, review current formal NC State policy and will be directed by Whetten. This group includes Despain, Knowles, Miller, Swanson, Broome, Prosise, and Rufty. Further possible divisions of the subgroups were discussed. For example, perhaps the subgroup studying existing policies would divide its work geographically among the universities or among the different issues of copyright. No final decisions were made beyond the division into two subgroups. [return to top of document] General discussion and background information. Hoon pointed out that the term "ownership" can be misleading and sometimes unnecessarily provocative to faculty members. Instead, a more appropriate view of the goal is the judicious "management" of intellectual property in which the university has a legitimate interest. Although generally in agreement with this, the task force decided to retain the term "ownership" as originally appointed. After discussion, the task force concluded that the intellectual property covered by any proposed copyright ownership policy should include traditional faculty works [journal articles, monographs, textbooks, etc.] as well as more problematic works such as distance education materials, online courseware and so forth. Members of the task force were given an overview of recent past and potential future activities regarding copyright ownership and use policies occurring at the General Administration system level. Last fall, an ad hoc group of attorneys from various constituent institutions within the UNC System drafted a policy governing use of copyrighted materials that was felt to be unduly conservative and not supportive of the legitimate exercise of fair use rights under the copyright statute. The draft policy generated significant concern and opposition among faculty who had no input into it, and it was shelved. Use of copyrighted works will be revisited this fall in conjunction with the creation of a system-level copyright ownership task force. Other activities within the UNC system were reviewed including those of UNC-CH's Scholarly Communication Committee, which drafted a lengthy document of recommendations in 1996-97, many of which were not formally adopted and/or funded. Hoon reported that, based on information from Gasaway, Director of the Law Library at UNC-CH and President of the UNC Faculty Assembly, there will be a copyright colloquium sponsored by the Faculty Assembly on November 5, 1998. This is the first Faculty Assembly sponsored colloquium. They hope to have an annual colloquium on varied topics. Ms. Gasaway also indicated that President Broad would be present and is strongly supportive of a systemwide policy on copyright ownership. However, institutions can vary widely on their copyright use policy. Another activity noted within the system is the increased interest in distance learning by East Carolina University. ECU faculty members must sign a form which states that the University owns the distance education course that the faculty member creates. It is not clear whether these faculty members are entirely cognizant of the implications of what they are signing. Generating faculty interest, awareness, and input. The first step in implementing the "widely consultative" aspect of the task force charge is raising awareness of copyright law, issues and concerns. One project currently underway and sponsored by the Scholarly Communication Subcommittee of the University Library Committee is a series of "Town Meetings" to be held around campus. These meetings are intended to educate faculty on copyright issues and to promote discussion and exchange of views. A draft copy of a "Town Meeting" flyer was distributed and discussed. Information generated by these Town Meetings will be provided to the task force. After discussion, the task force decided to recommend to the Scholarly Communication Subcommittee that it proceed with scheduling Town Meetings rather than wait for specific invitations from colleges or departments. It was further recommended that the meetings be held at diverse geographical locations and open to all as opposed to scheduling by college or department. As pointed out by Miller, faculty will need to be shown how these issues will directly impact them. The task force entertained other possible outreach modes such as Library and University Bulletin articles, a Technician article, a colloquium model, time at departmental and school meetings, and a web forum for those who could not be reached by town meetings. Other avenues for education include the Faculty Center for Teaching and Learning and the Scholarly Communication Center. Additionally, the Dean/Vice-Chancellor's Executive meeting was suggested as a forum for advertisement of the Town Meetings. Task force members were also asked to disseminate information throughout their own college to generate interest. A final avenue of communication might be including a Town Meeting as part of the Graduate School Ethics and Research Series. Raising awareness and educating would be the chief goal. The task force then discussed logistics for future meetings given the subgroup model the task force will now follow. It was determined that Danehower and Whetten would communicate with the members of their respective subgroups by way of e-mail, and these groups would plan their meetings separately from the larger task force. In October, the larger group would meet again, and each subgroup would discuss its findings. Whetten asked for questions. None were raised. The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 A.M. [return to top of document] Submitted by Annis C. Barbee.

Return to Ad hoc and Task Forces Return to COTF home page

Comments may be sent to academic@ncsu.edu

Last Updated: 3/23/99